five live streams just wouldn't work, something like that. Something like a 20% failure rate. As soon as you add just a little bit of complication to what I'm doing here, the failure rate would be about 20%, way above acceptable.

Well, if you'd like to enjoy the broadcast today in its maximum potential, I think you need to enjoy the simultaneous sip. And all you need is a cup of coffee, mug or a glass. I'll take your canteen, jug, flask, vessel with any liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better. Everything, everything, everything. It's called the simultaneous sip. But it's going to happen now. Go. Savor it. Savor it. Good. Good.

All right, we've got lots of fun news today. Did you see the videos of Vice President Kamala Harris saying to the immigrants in Central America in a speech, she said, and I quote, "Do not come. Do not come."

So that happened. Separately but related to the same trip, she gave an interview in which she was talking to somebody and she has an interesting hand gesture. Have you noticed that? You notice all the politicians have different hand gestures. There's the Trump. The Trump is the thumbs up, closed fist. Well we're gonna do this, we're gonna do this, right? With that motion. Then you've got the hands open version. That's one way of talking. Blah blah blah.

Kamala Harris has the most unique hand gestures I've ever seen. Now I can't reproduce them because I don't want to become a meme. So I'm going to describe it for my listeners without producing it visually.

Imagine if you will that you are holding a fist in front of you, roughly about the height of your own chin. And let's say that your hand was in a slightly closed position as if you were holding a rake. Yeah, say you were holding a rake and your hand was sort of about where your chin is. Now imagine that instead of just staying in one position, your hand, which is grasping an imaginary rake, sometimes goes up and sometimes goes down from that position in a rapid motion, from up to down and then down to up.

Now imagine if you will that the clip of that interview in which she made the motion a fairly large number of times, with the hand going from low to up and up to low, at the same time somebody took that and made a meme in which her quote "Do not come. Do not come" was overlaid with the visual.

Now I'm not saying that a meme maker should do that. I'm just saying it'd be funny if they did. That's all I'm saying. I don't mean to encourage it, but I certainly would tweet it.

Fake news alert. Fake news alert. Latest fake news. You would be amazed to learn that the story about Trump allegedly in his administration clearing Lafayette Park so he could hold a Bible photo op never happened. That's right. The entire news cycle that talked about Trump clearing this park just so he could have a photo op, clearing out protesters just so he could have a fake photo op, never happened.

So an investigation looked into it and found out that the clearing did happen, but it happened before the president decided about this photo op. And it was going to happen anyway. It was just a general security thing. And it was completely fake news from top to bottom. Reported as a fact for what, a year and a half or however long it was. A year maybe. Reported as a fact that never happened. Just wasn't a fact. Right?

So keep that in mind. Once again, another example of the news being absolutely made up. Just completely made up.

In related news, there's a poll. New polling from Morning Consult and Politico found that a third of Republican voters believe Trump will be reinstated by the end of this year. What? Are you serious? How many of you think that? In the comments, since I probably have more conservatives than anything else on here. How many of you think that Trump is going to be reinstated?

I see one yes, sir. I see I do. Somebody says mostly no's. So if you're listening to this, it's mostly no's. 99 no's it looks like. But uh, so do I just have a smarter audience? Because I'm pretty sure my audience skews pretty Republican. But you're overwhelmingly, you're saying no. I'm just seeing a sprinkling of yeses. So my audience is nowhere near one third think he's going to be reinstated.

You do know that there's no provision for that, right? The Constitution doesn't have a redo clause in it. Once it's certified, it's just done. There's nothing you can do. So for those of you who think it could happen, I'll just say this: there's no mechanism for it to happen. So thinking that Trump would be reinstated would be similar to thinking that a train might run across your front yard even though there are no tracks. You can't say it's impossible I suppose, but there are no train tracks in your front yard. It's not really likely a train is going to go by. Likewise, there's no system, no process, no law, no rule that would reinstate a president who has been certified, correctly or incorrectly, to have won the election. You can't get there from here. There's no way to get there. So that's not going to happen.

But a third of Republicans believe that, I guess according to an article in The Hill.

Who would you think is more trusted, the Trump administration back in its time or the news media? According to an Emerson College study or poll. And you would not be surprised that the Trump administration was considered truthful by roughly half of registered voters. Now it's no surprise that that would be almost entirely Republicans of course. But half of the public? Well actually if it's 49% it's a lot more than Republicans. So half of the country thinks the Trump administration was truthful. Which seems like a high number, doesn't it? For a politician. I'm not saying anything about Trump here, just for a politician. Half of the country believing they're honest? That feels high. I don't know.

But of course the numbers split along party lines. Nine out of ten Republicans were saying that, whereas three out of four Democrats said the opposite, of course.

Now the poll also found that 69% of Democrats think the news media is truthful. What? How could 69% of Democrats still believe the news is truthful? Even if they believed that their news was truthful and they believed that you know right-leaning news was not truthful, how could they have not noticed that the news is not the truth? How do you not notice that?

Whereas 91% of Republicans consider the fourth estate untruthful. That feels closer to being right, doesn't it? How do you, if you were going to say hey let's see which group is the smart one, the fact that 91% of Republicans don't trust the news kind of suggests they might be the smart ones. At least in this one question. I'm not going to say they're always on the right side, but on this one question it's sort of obvious.

But this is amazing. Now I would imagine that cognitive dissonance is a lot of the reason for this. Democrats need the news to be true to support their version of reality. So if they believe the news was fake then they wouldn't have any support for their version of reality. So probably this is just a psychological phenomenon.

Meanwhile independents think that both the Trump administration when it was in power and the news media are untruthful. I wonder if this might have been an older survey. I'm wondering if I saw the date wrong on this. Somebody tweeted this today but it's probably an older survey during the administration. Now that I think about it, I hate it when somebody tweets at me an old article because I have a bad habit of forgetting to look at the date when I retweet them. I might have done that here. But I doubt the numbers have changed much since then.

President Biden signed an executive order reversing Trump's, Trump tried to ban TikTok and WeChat because they're Chinese apps. And Biden is trying to be more of a thoughtful, thoughtful, careful systems guy. I like the systems part. But they're trying to come up with some criteria for any apps. So sort of a broad criteria so that it's not just about TikTok and WeChat but it's just about any app I guess, maybe any Chinese app, and some objective way to say whether it should be banned or not.

I would like to add to that conversation by saying I would like to give you a criteria for whether to ban these apps or not. And it goes like this: Does China have any control of your data? Does any of your data go through Chinese assets? That's it. That's the whole story. If any of your data goes through Chinese-owned infrastructure, it's vulnerable. Is there really any argument about that?

Do you think because it's encrypted they can't get at it? I don't know. If it's their app, I would think that they could encrypt it and unencrypt it. They own the encryption. So if you send encrypted data across a Chinese internet, when China owns the encrypting asset and also therefore logically they own the unencrypting asset on the other end, you don't think that they could unencrypt that in the middle? You think it has to get all the way to the end and that's the only place you can unencrypt it? If you have the technology to unencrypt it anywhere, if you get the signal you can unencrypt it.

So yeah, maybe there's a backdoor or whatever. I got a feeling this whole TikTok WeChat thing being reversed makes me wonder if the Biden administration is competent in terms of technology. Now you have to assume that they got plenty of experts, right? But does this reflect what the experts would have recommended? Because it's sort of this space that's half technical and half political, right? So it's a little bit of both. But this doesn't look like a technical recommendation. Because I think the technical recommendation would be dead simple. Does it go through any Chinese assets? Yes or no.

I mean I just don't know how this can be a big question. What am I missing? Are they going to come up with some kind of argument that says oh yeah the TikTok and WeChat traffic, it does go through all these Chinese assets but it's so well encrypted then nothing would happen? Are we going to believe that? Right?

And is that the only issue? Let me tell you how they have completely ignored the big issue. Are you ready? It's not about data privacy. Data privacy is a big deal and we should certainly hope that China is not stealing all our traffic. But there's a much, much bigger deal. Like much, maybe 10 times as big just to put a size on it. Maybe a hundred times as big. I don't think that would be out of the question. A hundred times bigger problem than the data privacy is influence.

If they can turn a knob and turn some TikTok meme from a you know thing that nobody would notice into the major thing trending on TikTok, then that jumps over to Snapchat and jumps over to Instagram, jumps over to Facebook. They can control what we think through apps. Mostly TikTok. WeChat would stay and you know stay in the Chinese language mostly I believe. But TikTok is how China can actually control opinion in this country.

Why do we let China control American opinions through this influence machine? So I didn't see the Biden adminis